CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.

M/S Paper Recycle, Mumbai vs. CIT (Appeal), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

…s case, at the minimum, cannot fall in this category. Our attention was invited to Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court's judgments in the cases of CIT v. Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited [(2014) 366 ITR 1 (Bom)] and CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd [(2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bom)]. What is on record, in this case, is an audit report which is prepared by a third party, i.e. an independent tax auditor, and a lapse in the tax audit report, as indeed in this case, cannot be put against the assessee for the purpose of a disallowance under section 143(1). For this short reason alone, according to the learned counsel, the…

Ace Global Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- CPC, Bangalore, ITO WD- 1(1), Thane

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran () & Kavitha Rajagopal () - A.Y. 2017-18 - A.Y. 2018-19

…ent of Hon’ble Apex Court. The Ld.AR further contended that the assessee has got a genuine case as the issue is squarely covered by various decisions, specifically the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd 368 ITR 749 (Bom) and prayed that the delay be condoned and the matters be set aside to the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. 4. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, opposed to the condonation of delay stating that the reasons provided by the assessee in the affidavits do not constitute sufficient cause to condone the huge delay in filing of the appeals. 5. Hav…

Ace Global Solutions Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC Bangalore & ITO WD1(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran () & Kavitha Rajagopal () - A.Y. 2017-18 - A.Y. 2018-19

…ent of Hon’ble Apex Court. The Ld.AR further contended that the assessee has got a genuine case as the issue is squarely covered by various decisions, specifically the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd 368 ITR 749 (Bom) and prayed that the delay be condoned and the matters be set aside to the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. 4. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, opposed to the condonation of delay stating that the reasons provided by the assessee in the affidavits do not constitute sufficient cause to condone the huge delay in filing of the appeals. 5. Hav…

Optech Engineering Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Years: 2017-18 M/S. Optech Engineering Pvt. Asst. Director Of Income Tax, Ltd., Cpc, D 151, Amar Gian, Post Bag No.2, Vs. Opp New St Stand, Electronic City Post Office, Khopat, Bangalore – 560 500 Thane- 400 601 Pan: Aaaco7459C (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Dinesh Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 20 . 07 . 2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25 . 07 . 2022 O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The A.O. U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For A.Y. 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us:

…. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC failed to appreciate that the disallowance of Rs. 5,15,654/- is governed by the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in "CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd (2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bombay) and Geekay Securit Services (P.) Ltd.vs. DCT. (2019) 101 taxmann.con 192 (Bombay)”. Thus, the disallowance of Rs 6,15,654/- may be deleted. 2 M/s. Optech Engineering Pvt. Ltd. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC erred in holding that the explanations 2 and 5 to Sections 36(1)(va) and 43B of the Act are re…

Aaryans Security Force, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi

In the result, this appeal is allowed

…ITA No.1875/Mum/2021 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Page 1 of 10 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘SMC’ BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar (Vice President)] and Sandeep Singh Karhail (Judicial Member)] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Aaryans Security Force Partner …………………….. Appellant B-307, Twin Complex, Marol, Maroshi Road, Marol Naka, Andheri (E), Mumbai 4000959 [PAN: AAWFA4901A] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 24 (1)(1) Mumbai ………………….Respondent Appearances: R.D. Khona for the appellant Sudha Ramchandran for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : April 19, 2022 Date of pronouncement the order : July 15, 2022 O…

Accenture Solutions Pvt Ltd. (Asol) As A Successor to Accenture Serivces Pvt Ltd (Aspl), Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Circle- 14 (1)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Accenture Solutions The Dy. Commissioner O Pvt. Ltd. (‘Asol’), Income Tax, (As A Successor To Circle 14(1)(1), Accenture Services Pvt. 475, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd. (‘Aspl’) Which Has M.K. Road, Merged Into Asol With An Mumbai - 400020 Effective Date Of 1 Vs. December 2016) Plant 3, Godrej & Boyce Complex, Phirojshah Nagar, Vikhroli West, Off L.B.S Marg, Mumbai – 400 079 Pan: Aacca8997K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…und that the same were not deposited within the due date prescribed under the Act. However, this issue is now no longer res-integra as has been decided in favour of the assessee by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT V. Ghatge Patil Transporters Ltd. 368 ITR 749 by confirming the order passed by the Tribunal that deduction claimed by the assessee on account of employees contribution to PF & ESIC well before the due date of filing return of income is allowable deduction. 20. Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in case of Ghatge Patil Transporters Ltd. (supra) held that both employees’ and employer’s contributio…

DCIT, Circle -1, Thane vs. M/S Accura Pharmaquip Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

…s case, at the minimum, cannot fall in this category. Our attention was invited to Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court’s judgments in the cases of CIT Vs Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited [(2014) 366 ITR 1 (Bom)] and CIT Vs Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd [(2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bom)].What is on record, in this case, is an audit report which is prepared by a third party, i.e. an independent tax auditor, and a lapse in the tax audit report, as indeed in this case, cannot be put against the assessee for the purpose of a disallowance under section 143(1). For this short reason alone, according to the learned counsel, the i…

Jagdamba Service Solution Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT(A) (NFAC)- Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

…s case, at the minimum, cannot fall in this category. Our attention was invited to Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court’s judgments in the cases of CIT Vs Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited [(2014) 366 ITR 1 (Bom)] and CIT Vs Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd [(2014) 368 ITR 749 (Bom)].What is on record, in this case, is an audit report which is prepared by a third party, i.e. an independent tax auditor, and a lapse in the tax audit report, as indeed in this case, cannot be put against the assessee for the purpose of a disallowance under section 143(1). For this short reason alone, according to the learned counsel, the i…